Star Trek was Pro-Life- Now They Want to Make it Pro-Abortion

 

 

Star Trek was Pro-Life Now They Want to Make it Pro-Abortion
By
James Scott Trimm

 

(An earlier version of this blog wrongly reported Disney owned TV rights to Star Trek, based on inaccurate reporting found on the internet.)

I  have been a lifetime fan of Star Trek.  I was born in 1966, the same year Star Trek was born.  I grew up watching the original series, reading the earliest novels, the Gold Key comics, and the animated series.  When I was thirteen Star Trek the Motion Picture came out, with even more books and a Marvel comic version.  Just as I was becoming an adult, Star Trek the Next Generation came out.  Star Trek was a huge part of my life, and helped shape my life philosophy.  In fact I have two books, in my library, dating to my childhood, on that very topic (among well over 100 Star Trek Books in my Library): Star Trek Speaks and Meaning In Star Trek. Without realizing it, I modeled myself after Spock, choosing the Stoic philosophy and with 3-D Chess as a pastime.

I was delighted with the Star Trek Continues fan production (2013-2017) from Vic Mignonga (Who is a Christian), because it made a point of making the types of episodes that were in keeping with the original vision.  (I encourage Star Trek Fans to watch it, it is real Star Trek).

Recently the Star Trek TV website published a blog titled Star Trek Has Always Advocated For Choice which attempts to make the case that Star Trek has always been pro-abortion.  The blog makes a strained and twisted argument based on the STNG episode The Measure of a Man that supposedly supports abortion.  In fact this episode is a Pro-life allegory.  In this episode Picard defends Data's right to life, from those who do not believe he has a right to life, and who want to dismember him,  What a clear pro-life message.

But the pro-life message was an even bigger part of the original vision of Star Trek.  Star Trek was born the same year I was born (1966).  It was also the year of the death of Margaret Sanger., the eugenics and abortion activist who was the founder of the original Planned Parenthood and is recognized as the founder of the modern "reproductive rights" (double speak for "abortion") movement.  

Just a few months after her death, the original producer of Star Trek (Gene Roddenberry) produced the season one episode Space Seed The episode was originally written by Carey Wilber to involve heroes from ancient Greece, but  was revised by show runner Gene L. Coon and Roddenberry himself to involve genetically superior humans, who left earth after the Eugenics Wars originally set in the 1990s.  It is no surprise that the villain's name was  Khan Noonien Singh, echoing the name of Eugenics activist Margaret Sanger.  

This episode not only inspired the sequel in Star Trek II the Wrath of Khan, but sent ripples thru the Star Trek universe and it's sequels.  The idea that earth outlawed eugenics after the Eugenics Wars which became a foundational part of earth culture in the series.

This eventually led to an episode of STNG titled The Masterpiece Society which involved a colony which had left earth hundreds of years earlier to build a eugenics based society.  The colony is facing destruction from a stellar core fragment from a disintegrated Neutron star.   Chief Engineer Geordi La Forge who was born blind, discovers a technology that can save the colony, as part of the technology which was originally developed to create the visor that allows him to see.  This irony is the central message of the episode with some amazing pro-life dialog coming from Geordi who points out that he would not have been allowed to be be born on their colony.  Here is the amazing Pro-life dialog:

Lt. Commander Geordi La Forge : So... guess if I had been conceived on your world, I wouldn't even be here now, would I?

Hannah Bates : No.

Lt. Commander Geordi La Forge : No. I'd have been... terminated as a fertilized cell.

Hannah Bates : It was the wish of our founders that no one have to suffer a life with disabilities.

Lt. Commander Geordi La Forge : Who gave them the right to decide whether or not I should be here, whether or not I might have something to contribute?

...

Lt. Commander Geordi La Forge : Oh, that's perfect.

Hannah Bates : What?

Lt. Commander Geordi La Forge : If the answer to all of this is in a VISOR created for a blind man who never would have existed in your society. No offense intended.

 Anyone who is seriously familiar with the subject knows that Star Trek was specifically Pro-Life and that it's anti-eugenics pro-life stance was woven into the fabric of the show...

Klicks Dirty Trick's - Evil Prevailed Last Night

 

 

Klicks Dirty Trick's - Evil Prevailed Last Night
By
James Scott Trimm

It has been said that the only thing necessary for evil to prevail, is for good men to do (or say) nothing.  So let it be with the recent election for House District 91.  I am supposed to move on, perhaps even congratulate Mrs. Klick on her victory.  But I cannot do that.  The world needs to know and remember, that evil prevailed.

David Lowe, a decorated American combat veteran, ran a clean, issue based campaign.  A campaign of which he could be proud.  He knocked on 9,000 doors and talked one on one with voters,  On Primary day, most of Klick's constituents voted against her, bringing her into a runoff with David Lowe.

The serious dishonesty from the Klick campaign began when they began airing TV and radio ads that played an out of context audio quote from David Lowe, cut off in the middle of a sentence, to make it appear David Lowe is pro-choice, which then immediately cut to pleasant music and "but pro-life champion Stephanie Klick..."  In fact the quote was cut off before Lowe said the words "all we need to do is abolish abortion in Texas,"  This dirty trick was bad enough, but it was nothing compared to what came later.

The Klick camp waited until five days before early runoff voting began, and then released an all out assault of blatant lies about David Lowe.  Mailers and Facebook ads declared that Lowe owned pornographic websites, had invested in pornographic businesses , was involved in "human trafficking" and that this had been "uncovered by law enforcement".  All of these things were patently false.  David Lowe was never owned or operated a pornographic website, never invested in a pornographic business, was certainly never involved in human trafficking, nor was he involved in any criminal activity uncovered by law enforcement.  All of these things, stated by Facebook ads and mailers that bombarded the voters of HD 91 just as early voting began.  This was intentionally launched just before and during early voting, so that there would be no time to effectively respond to the large number of lies.

The truth is that over ten years ago, David Lowe engaged in armature "Domain Name Peculation", an investment scheme of purchasing domain names and holding them, hoping to sell them at a higher value.  This is an internet analogy to land speculation.  At no time did David operate any pornographic websites.  The domain names remained "parked" waiting for resale,  David owned literally hundreds of domain names at the time. which he bought and traded in bulk, the vast majority of which were innocuous domain names.  However a domain name is not a website, nor is it a business, any more than a physical address is a building (it may only be an empty lot).  And even a bad sounding domain name, can be used simply to drive internet traffic.  One could, for example. purchase a naughty sounding domain name, and point it to a Christian website, in an effort to reach the lost.  Or the domain "findsomesex.com" could used as a clever name for a business that gives sonograms and tells you the sex of your baby.  The point is, that a url is not, in itself a website of a business.  

The fact is that the Klick camp launched a campaign of outright lies about David Lowe in a last minute, dirty tricks campaign, and sadly, our Tarrant County Sheriff Bill Waybourn, participated in this campaign of lies, whole heatedly!

The sad fact is that the trust of the voters was violated and this election was stolen from the voters just as sure as if the ballot box was stuffed.  

I am supposed to keep my mouth shut about this steal and take this loss gracefully.  After all, if I say anything about these things, it is "sour grapes".  But far more importantly, my silence is all evil needs to prevail and propagate,

 Evil prevailed, but I am making sure that it has done so in broad daylight, not under the cover of darkness!

 

  

 

 

 

Stephanie Klick Does Not Believe Preborn Babies are "Persons" (Understanding Equal Protection)

 

Stephanie Klick Does Not Believe Preborn Babies are "Persons"
(Understanding Equal Protection)
By
James Scott Trimm

  

In the runoff race between Klick and Lowe for House District 91, Lowe has been criticized for supporting "Equal Protection" for the unborn.  Klick's camp has falsely claimed, based on his belief in "Equal Protection", that Lowe supports the death penalty for women who abort their babies.  This is actually false, because David (and myself) are opposed to the death penalty (based on the potential for wrongful convictions)and the Abolish Abortion bill which Klick blocked, and which Lowe supports (HB3326) does not mention the death penalty, only equal protection.  But what does "equal protection" mean, and why is is so important?

Section 1 of the 14th Amendment to the  US Constitution reads:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

This amendment says that a "person" cannot be deprived of "life, liberty or property" without due process.  This, friends, is your Constitutional right to life!  And the second phrase is very important.  This second phrase says that a person is also guaranteed "equal protection of the laws".    This critical right prevents there from being one "due process" to protect one class of people, and a different "due process" to protect another group of people.  This amendment was passed, because, at the time, there were many who did not want African Americans to have the same protection under the law, as a white man.  Today we call these people bigots.

There is a new class of bigots today.  Now we have a group of people who do not want Pre-born babies to have the same protection under the law as those already born.  This is a new type of bigotry.

 Now if we want to abolish abortion in Texas, we simply need to declare that the pre-born are "persons".  This makes prefect sense, since the Preamble of the US Constitution promises to "secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity" and our "posterity" are by definition, the pre-born.

By declaring the pre-born to be "persons" we guarantee their "right o life" and their right to "equal protection under the law".  It is very important to realize that a "person" under the 14th Amendment must be entitled to both.  If you do not believe in "equal protection" for the pre-born, then you do not believe, at least Constitutionally, that they are "persons" with a "right to life".  According to the 14th Amendment, all three of these things: personhood, the right to life, and equal protection of the law, go together.  No one of them can truly exist without the others.  

My point is, that if you do not believe in equal protection for the pre-born, (And Stephanie Klick has telegraphed very strongly that she does not, in criticizing Lowe for having this belief) then you do not really believe that the pre-born are actually "persons" with a 14th amendment right to life, and you are part of this new class of bigotry!

 Unfortunately, Texas Right to Life, which has recently gone full RINO (see my last blog Texas Right to Life Goes Full RINO)  and they appear to have also opposed the idea that the pre-born should have "equal protection".  

There is a pro-life organization in Texas that is fighting for Texas to recognize the pre-born as persons with both a right to life and equal protection under the 14th amendment, that organization is Abolish Abortion Texas, and they are very much worthy of your support.

PS:  For the record, since yesterday I have been blocked from commenting on the Texas Right to Life Facebook Page. Of course I am even more Pro-Life than they have become. Apparently their position has become so weak, that it cannot withstand debate! To Texas Right to Life: " Have I now become your enemy because I tell you the truth?" (Gal. 4:16). To everyone else: If you want to abolish abortion in Texas not just regulate it, support David Lowe for HD 91 in the runoff, and support Abolish Abortion Texas. Texas Right to Life has gone full RINO!

 

 

 

Lowe vs. Klick: Is there a Constitutional Right to an Abortion?

 

 

Lowe vs. Klick: Is there a Constitutional Right to an Abortion?
By
James Scott Trimm

There is a battle taking place for the soul of the Republican Party of Texas.   Should we just accept that there is a Constitutional right to an abortion and then seek to regulate abortion within the framework of Roe v. Wade?  Or should we ignore Roe v. Wade, declare that an unborn baby is a "person" and therefore entitled to "equal protection under the law" with a right to life under the 14th Amendment? 

At the center of this battle is the race for Texas House District 91 between Stephanie Klick, who blocked the Abolish Abortion bill (HB3326) called for as a Texas GOP Legislative Priority in the Texas GOP Platform, and David Lowe, who has pledged to support it.

This blog has been a long time in the coming, but the time has come that these words had to be said.  Over the years I have often blogged in support of Texas Right to Life as Texas "real" Pro-Life organization, and exposing Texas Alliance for Life as a "fake" Pro-Life organization, which exists only to give cover to RINOs who were not Pro-Life at all.

As early as 2015 I blogged about this in my blog The Establishment’s Plan to Oust Jonathan Stickland and a few weeks later in  See I Told You So! Stickland’s Challenger Exposed Again

I spoke out for Texas Right to Life over Texas Alliance for life again in December 2015 when  Houston Methodist Succeeds in Effort to Let Chris Dunn Die and again in January 2016 in my blog Joe Pojman’s TAL Declares Euthanasia "Morally Legitimate"

The point here is, that I have, in the past, long supported Texas Right to Life as Texas "real" Pro-Life organization. But that now has to change.

Back in 2015 I wrote a blog titled How Texas Can Reclaim Our Sovereignty and in 2016 I wrote the initial draft of The Texas Sovereignty Act which was filed in the Texas House and Texas Senate, and would have created a mechanism for Texas to enforce the Tenth Amendment, and among other things ignore Roe v. Wade and abolish abortion in Texas!  

Later that same session Tony Tinderholt filed the first bill to outright abolish abortion in Texas by ignoring Roe v. Wade and declaring the unborn a "person" (A position I had supported in yet another early blog)

To my shock, I could not seem to get my friends at Texas Right to Life to support either bill to abolish abortion in Texas!   Here we had not one, but two bills that could end abortion in Texas, and Texas Right to Life was unwilling to support either one of them!  It was then that I realized that there were people who had built careers and livelihoods around fighting abortion, people who's careers would be over, if they ever actually won the fight!  

In fact both bills have been filed and refiled in every legislative session since, and Texas Right to Life has refused to support them to this very day!

Instead, Texas Right to Life has adopted a philosophy of "working within the framework of Roe. v. Wade" to regulate rather than actually abolish abortion.  This philosophy actually means effectively acknowledging that there is a constitutional right to an abortion.  Through this philosophy Texas Right to Life has even supported bills that actually codified Roe v. Wade into Texas law!  The idea has been to exploit loopholes in Roe v. Wade to regulate abortion, rather than to actually abolish abortion.  In fact, some of the bills passed under this philosophy have actually codified Roe v. Wade into Texas law!

This philosophy has been compared to that surrounding slavery in the 19th century.  Abolitionists wanted to end slavery outright, which "Incrementalists" wanted to phase slavery out through regulation an "incremental" steps.  This "incrementalism"  is reminiscent of Zeno's Dichotomy Paradox, where one takes a step towards a goal, only covering half the distance to the goal in each step.  One would never actually reach the goal, only approach it into infinity.  

Once again we have Abolitionists, who want to actually abolish abortion, declaring the unborn as "persons" guaranteed equal protection under the law, and Incrementalists who want to endlessly regulate abortion "within the framework of Roe v. Wade."  

The Heartbeat Bill, for example, seeks to work within the framework of Roe v. Wade with a loophole to the enforcement mechanism.  What many do not realize is that this bill, at the same time, codifies in Texas law that is is legal to kill an unborn person who does not yet have a heartbeat, something which should never be codified in Texas law! 

There is a huge problem with the enforcement mechanism for the heartbeat bill.  Instead of the State enforcing the law, which Roe v. Wade would prohibit, because there is a supposed Constitutional right to an abortion, the bill allows individual citizens to sue anyone involved in the abortion for $10,000 dollars.  The problem is, that even if this loophole is found Constitutional, it will have established a Supreme Court precedent that would also allow states to pass laws curtailing any Constitutional right (Remember, this bill does not challenge Roe v. Wade, but seeks to work within its framework, creating an enforcement loophole).  States could pass laws empowering any citizen to sue another citizen for owning or carrying a firearm.  States could even pass laws allowing atheists to sue Christians or Jews in matters that should enjoy first amendment protection.  In fact any actual Constitutional right right could be nullified in this manner.  This is the danger of trying to work within the framework of Roe v. Wade and accepting that there is a Constitutional right to an abortion, and then trying to find a way to nullify a supposed Constitutional Right!  

The key to abolishing abortion in Texas, is to work within the framework of the actual Constitution, not the Supreme Court's opinion.   The actual Constitution states that it's purpose is to "secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity" (Preamble) and our "posterity" are by definition, the unborn!  We must declare that the unborn are "persons" and therefor entitled to 14th amendment protections afforded "persons" under Amendment 14 Section 1 of the US Constitution, not to be deprived of "life liberty or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."  (Click here for my blog on how Texas can ignore Roe v. Wade )

This means that even if the courts were to try to create a supposed "due process" for an abortion, the unborn would still also enjoy the same laws to protect them from being deprived of life that you and I enjoy (such as laws against murder etc.)

Liberals and RINOS hate this idea so much, that they have tried to spin this to mean that a woman who has an abortion would be subject to the death penalty.  But this is simply not true.  First of all, the death penalty is a separate issue entirely.  Many, like myself, support personhood and equal protection for the unborn, while being opposed to the death penalty in either case*. Moreover, this is also an example of the left presenting a super-unlikely scenario as if it would be likely to actually happen.  For a mother who aborted her child to be subjected to a death penalty, the following things would have to happen, that would not, in reality, happen.  First a detective would have to investigate an abortion as a capitol murder.  Then he would have to submit the case to an assistant DA who would have to get his DA to sign off on the prosecution.  Then he would have to present this to a grand jury, who would have to choose to hand down an indictment.  Then a judge or jury would have to convict and hand down a death sentence, which would then have to pass thru several mandatory appeals.  Even if a case went that far (which would not happen in the real world) then the governor would have to choose not to exercise clemency in such a case.  There is just no way that a woman would ever actually bee subjected to the death penalty for an abortion.  But liberals and RINOS have to argue this bizarre crazy scenario, because they cannot allow the unborn to be recognized as "persons" with a right to life!

Regarding Texas Right to Life, it also bears mentioning here that there has been a huge turnover in Texas Right to Life Personnel in recent months.  As recently reported in Current Revolt:

In November of 2021, news broke that Jim Graham executive director of TXRTL and Kari Beckman, founder of home school hybrid Regina Caeli Academy, were involved an an affair.

Texas Right to Life and Regina Caeli Academy responded by removing both Graham and Beckman from their perspective organizations, with Graham also being removed from the board of Regina Caeli as he was connected to both organizations.

This left TXRTL in a very odd situation considering Jim Graham’s wife, Elizabeth Graham, was an active director for TXRTL.
Sources close to TXRTL have told us that this week Elizabeth Graham has been terminated from her role as Director.

That same source also told Current Revolt that Development Director, Rebekah Lentz, had left the organization citing frustrations with leadership at TXRTL. For those unaware, the Development Director role is the key position responsible for fundraising and maintaining donor relationships.

We’re told with the loss of both Jim Graham, Rebekah Lentz, and now Elizabeth Graham, the organization is left struggling to maintain relationships with big money donors.
(Current Revolt; TROUBLE INSIDE TEXAS RIGHT TO LIFE?)

Meanwhile, in recent years, a new Texas organization has come on the scene called Abolish Abortion Texas, which does not believe there is a Constitutional right to an abortion, does not "work within the framework of Roe v. Wade" but instead advocates ignoring Roe. v. Wade, declaring the personhood of  the unborn, and guaranteeing the unborn "equal protection under the law" thus protecting them from being deprived of their right to life under the 14th Amendment.

Texas Right to Life has now even started co-opting the "abolish" and "abolition" terminology in a masterful exercise of "double speak" so as to pretend to support abolition that they have in reality actually opposed.. 

This conflict has now culminated in a battle for Texas House Seat 91, between RINO establishment candidate Stephanie Klick (who has become infamous for blocking all bills to protect children from gender modification, which she has recently even refereed to as a "type of care") and decorated combat veteran and Abolitionist, David Lowe.

During the last legislative session, Klick, as chair of the Health Committee, blocked HB3326, the Abolish Abortion Bill, refusing to even give it a hearing!  This was the only bill that would have actually abolished abortion in Texas!  

This, despite the fact that HB3326 was one of only eight Legislative Priorities set by the delegate on the Texas GOP Platform:

Abolition of Abortion

Abolish abortion by ensuring the right to life and equal protection of the laws to all preborn children from the moment of fertilization.

Texas GOP Legislative Priorities

Texas Right to Life has endorsed RINO Stephanie Klick as a "Pro Life Hero" who championed their agenda of keeping abortion legal in Texas, but simply regulating abortion within the framework of Roe v. Wade.  The truth is that Klick refused to even give a hearing to the only Abortion bill that was a Texas GOP Legislative Priority, single handedly killing that bill!

Lets make this clear, the new establishment Texas Right to Life has endorsed Klick as a "Pro-Life Hero", while in reality Klick blocked the Abolish Abortion Bill (HB3326), the only pro-life bill actually called for as a Legislative Priority in the Texas Republican Party Platform!

 

Meanwhile Abolish Abortion Texas has effectively backed David Lowe, who has pledged his support for the Abolish Abortion Bill.  (They have not actually endorsed Lowe, as they are not a PAC, but they have educated voters about Klick.)

 

 

 

Stephanie Klick, who has been endorsed by both Texas Right to Life and fake pro-life group Texas Alliance for Life, claims to have the support of "every major pro-life group in Texas."  She fails to realize that Abolish Abortion Texas has become a major player in fighting Abortion in Texas, and can no longer be discounted and dismissed by the establishment!

In the Primary March 1st, David Lowe dragged Klick kicking and screaming into a runoff. 

Klick has falsely accused David Lowe of supporting the death penalty for women who have abortions.  Klick's strained reasoning is that Lowe, in agreement with the Texas Republican Party Platform legislative priorities, supports "equal protection" and personhood for the unborn.  

Lowe, however, has said he does not support the death penalty at all, due to the potential for irrevocable false convictions.  And HB3326 does not even mention the death penalty, only equal protection and personhood. 

In fact, Klick's problem is not with David Lowe so much, as with the Texas Republican Party platform Legislative Priorities!  In fact in the last two sessions, as a committee chair, Klick has killed three Texas GOP legislative priorities! (Election Integrity, protecting children from gender modification, and the Abolish Abortion Bill.)

I sent an email to Texas Right to Life back in November (just thee days after their Executive Director had been exposed for his affair)  and finally got a response just this week (March 22nd) saying:

Sorry that I'm just now seeing this message. Stephanie Klick is one of the most effective and committed Pro-Life representatives in Texas history. Unfortunately, David Lowe is demonstrating very disappointing behavior by lying about Stephanie's record. Klick passed an abolition bill out of her committee twice as part of the historic 13 Pro-Life bills she passed out of her committee last session. David Lowe is unqualified for our endorsement based on his commitment to oppose any Pro-Life bill that doesn't utilize a strategy of nullification. I've worked with David Lowe before and I think he's a good man. But his naivete and self-righteous stance on strategy would ensure more preborn babies are killed and be dangerously detrimental to the Pro-Life cause.

Thanks,
Luke Bowen
Political Director
Texas Right to Life

 First of all TRTL says "Stephanie Klick is one of the most effective and committed Pro-Life representatives in Texas history" Because she has pushed thru their agenda of working within the framework of Roe v. Wade and effectively recognizing that there is a Constitutional right to an abortion, and that our best hope is to regulate abortion.  But Klick actually single handedly killed the only bill that would have actually abolished abortion in Texas (HB3326) and which was the only Proi-Life bill that was a Legislative Priority item in the GOP Platform! 

Texas Right to Life claims Lowe is "lying about Stephanie's record. Klick passed an abolition bill out of her committee twice as part of the historic 13 Pro-Life bills she passed out of her committee last session"  But the reality is that Klick killed the only bill to actually abolish abortion (HB3326) and Texas Right to Life is now using double speak to refer to bills as "abolition" bills that would not actually abolish abortion in Texas! (and which also don't fit the description in the Texas Republican Party Platform Legislative Priorities)  Sadly they are doing this so as to confuse the public, which actually wants to abolish abortion, because they feel threatened by "Abolish Abortion Texas" and to try to identify themselves with a GOP Platform Legislative Priority that calls for abolishing abortion.  

Texas Right to Life says  David Lowe is unqualified for our endorsement based on his commitment to oppose any Pro-Life bill that doesn't utilize a strategy of nullification. Actually Lowe has never said any such thing.  However Lowe has pledged his support for the Abolish Abortion bill which will be filed again in the next session.  When Texas Right to Life bashes the "strategy of nullification" they refer to enforcing the tenth amendment, as well as declaring the unborn to be "persons" with 14th amendment protections.  When the criticize "nullification" or Roe v. Wade, they are using carefully crafted words to say that they now believe the correct strategy is to accept Roe v. Wade, accept that there really is a Constitutional right to an abortion, and  that we must work within the framework of Roe v. Wade to regulate abortion!

In fact, when Texas Right to Life says this. they are essentially saying that David Lowe is not eligible for their endorsement because he actually supports the only Pro-Life bill that was a Texas GOP Priority Legislative Platform item!   In other words, actually supporting the Texas GOP Platform Priority Legislative Priorities, makes one intelligible for the Texas Right to Life endorsement.  This is also saying that refusing to accept that their is a Constitutional right to an abortion, now makes one intelligible to receive a Texas Right to Life endorsement!

So we are all now left with one question that we must ask ourselves "Do you believe that there is a constitutional right to an abortion?

If your answer is "no", then path is clear, ignore the Roe v. Wade opinion, and work within the tenth amendment of the US Constitution (Remember SCOTUS is not the Constitution, but only another branch of the Federal Government which the 10th Amendment restrains), declare the unborn to be "persons" with 14th Amendment rights and thus abolish abortion in Texas!

If, like me, you believe we need to abolish abortion in Texas, there are three things you can do:

1. Help David Lowe defeat Stephanie Klick (if you don't live in district 91, then donate to Lowe's campaign and/or volunteer).  

2. Help Abolish Abortion Texas  (and stop donating to "Pro-Life" group that are now advocating working within the framework of Roe v. Wade, donate to Abolish Abortion Texas, and has actually fought against the Texas Republican Party Legislative Priority bill to abolish abortion!

3. Check out Free the States, a group working with all states to Abolish Abortion 

One more thing: Beware!  Leftists within our party are already working to change our platform to a form that will eliminate "equal protection" and personhood for the unborn, and instead accept that there is a Constitutional Right to an abortion, guised under the idea of "working within the framework of Roe v. Wade. Look for establishment RINOS to work to "walk back" our Texas GOP Platform on this issue at the State convention this June!

 ------------------

* My own reasons for opposing the death penalty is that we will never achieve the Biblical criteria of at least two witnesses ( Deut. 17:6 ; 19:15) who must be subject themselves to execution for perjury, should they be found to perjure themselves (Deut. 19:16-19) and who must also initiate the execution themselves by their own hands ( Deut 17:7).  Without these criteria, I don't believe human governments have authority from God to carry out a death sentence.